THREE man teams (2 frames each) - Proposals Scrapped!

[Steve Butler]

I give up !!!!. No substitutes ??. Arnold will be reduced to ONE team next year. Wish I hadnt even suggested the "6 frame, 4 man squad" format to move forward with snooker and the Nazareth House Snooker League.

You had two teams before the substitutes rule came in this season so I don't see how you can suggest that the withdrawal of that rule will force you to only enter one team.

I also recall at one of the league meetings you said you were against the substitutes rule.  You need to make your mind up!

Judging from what you have been saying about struggling for players (and the potential loss of Gary Spencer) you were heading towards one team next season anyway.

If you really want to continue with two teams perhaps you should look at recruiting a few more dedicated/reliable players!

Happy daze.....

:england:

[Alan Cunningham]

I AM against the substitute rule under the current variation because it has been abused too much and was being over used.
One player could actually play a singles and pairs for the 'B' team and the same for the 'A' team, making a total of 4 frames in one night ! ! ! .

As for Arnold only having ONE team next season, this is most likely being forced on us by your recent proposal that the home team shall have 2 tables available to play 6 frames of snooker. Assuming our 'A' team enter the Div 1 they will occupy 2 tables. There will be no table for the 'B' team because I am told we always have to leave 1 table available for other club members. Under the current system they used 1 table for each team, then if there are no other members in the club, they use the spare table to speed-up the match. Thats why I was more towards the 4 man-6 frame, 7.30 start, format.

:blush:

[Mike Langdon]

I AM against the substitute rule under the current variation because it has been abused too much and was being over used.

I'm not sure it was abused Alan or even used that much.  At Pegasus it was only B team players standing in for absent A teamers which hardly gave the A team an advantage whilst the B team used James Booth just once in the whole season  :question:

I must confess to be puzzled by the Arnold A team postponing matches when they had the option as we did to use B team players.  I was hoping that this rule would (Should) have stopped postponements where clubs had 2 sides and ensure both sides completed the season with the confidence that they could so with the smallest pool of players possible hopefully encouraging other teams to enter B teams.

I presume you would be more happy going back to the old substitutes ruling which offered absolutely nothing to the B team and was rarely taken up by the A team anyway.

To be honest we'll probably end up with exactly the same format next year as it appears impossible to change anything without upsetting someone......It's Draining

[Steve Howard]

Hi Mike & Alan,

I know that over at Arnold,Alan's correct in saying that they usually only have 2 tables to play matches on,as like Alan says it's only fair 2 leave 1 table for fellow club members!
But . . .they will then open up the third table once they know that members are no longer wishing to use it.So that in itself seems reasonable and only fair to me.

Re-Arnold A not using the subs from their B team Mike, i totally agree,it's confusing why they wouldn't use them . . .
The only real conclusion you can possibly draw from this is that Arnold would rather postpone matches rather than play their B team as subs,possibly their thinking is that their B team subs could possibly lose them vital frames? . . .But Mike . . .we both agreed in earlier posts that there shouldn't be postponements didn't we . . .other than inclement weather conditions for example!

As for the whole issue,of the 3 man 2 frames,it's amazing how many were for it,isn't it? . . then when the votes were counted it was clear that what people actually said they wanted before the votes,was actually NOTwhat they wanted in the end!
A quote from an earlier post from Steve Butler sums it up when he says 'actions spoke louder than words'

In the end after all the drawn out debate,nearly everyone seemed to want the new proposed system,who wouldn't have wanted to turn out for 2 frames? Tho' when the votes were in,it was a different story,so i agree totally with you Mike, it's been a draining amount of time, and progression hasn't really been made,for the good of snooker in general,more divisions and teams was what it is all about,nothing more,nothing less!!!!

[Mike Langdon]

Hi Steve, Hope all is well.  I don't think we'll ever please everybody which is why as Steve & Daniel have stated before, a democracy doesn't work when running leagues!  Should have just changed it to the 3/4 man teams playing 6 frame matches and been done with it.  Everybody would probably of signed up, some may have grumbled a little but would have got on with it anyway and we would have had a strong 4 divisions with some new teams in a much more competitive league.  As it was the whole thing was derailed by a couple of mutterings about team spirit being lost (unproven and to be honest pretty small fodder compared to risking losing some of our teams next season and putting an end to the new teams we had lined up to join)..oh well

I must confess to just feeling like dropping the whole idea of 2 frames per player (that was only ever the carrot, the real issue was ensuring more teams in our league, creating more divisions and protecting the sides we already have that are stuggleing to put out 6 players each week).

Anyway, if the 12 frame format for the top division does go ahead...but even I'm having doubts about it's suitability within the 6-8 man team format as I'm worried about it expanded the gap between the teams in the top half and the teams in the bottom half. (Thought the individual handicaps worked well in the divisional cups by the way)

So what I'm gathering from all the recent posts is that teams with only one table should be able to play in the top division (don't see it being a problem especially with the 10/10 option).
substitutes - yes, but not playing for 2 teams on the same night.
No Postponements

Mike

[Steve Butler]

I'm with you Mike.  I'm fed up of the whole saga and just want to move on now.

I think we should just scrap the whole format change idea and leave things as they are.

As you know I won't be at the EGM.  Perhaps you could just try to get agreement for the no postponements rule.  This is important because it frees up a lot of "free" weeks for extra cup matches which would be great because I think the KO Cup group matches and the new divisional cups have been a huge success this season.

Regarding subsitutes, I agree with what you say and I think substitutes would be used more often if we don't allow postponements because teams will be forced to use them.

Good luck at the EGM!

:thumbup:

To Lee Crombie
I was looking forward to welcoming your team back to the league under the 3/4 man team format and it's a shame that you may again have to miss out due to lack of players.  Your club have been very supportive of the NHSL over the years, no more so than at the golf days where you have turned out in large numbers on both occasions.  I know you are also planning on bringing a large number this year even though you don't have a team competing which is fantastic.  The fact that you intend to come to the EGM on 8th April when so many team captains haven't been to a single meeting this season says a lot!

[Lee Crombie]

hi Steve

It was a shame this year that SHERWOOD had to drop out with mick running things for us last year he never said that he was not going to run things this year so it all went tits up but that's the past. watching our things have been going this year with (nshl) Sherwood as kind of missed it all so i have taken it up on myself to try and get Sherwood snooker back. And with new owners now they want to move sherwood forward and i want to help. Reading all the forum comments over the last few weeks about the new season ahead i feel a little confused about what is happening.
lee crombie 

[Steve Butler]

I'm not surprised you are confused.  There has been a lot of talk on the forum about what may change but the fact is that no rules can change unless they are voted for at an EGM or AGM.  The results of my survey showed that the league was split right down the middle with half of the league wanting to stay exactly as we are and the other half wanting to change to smaller 3 or 4 man teams.  Because of this split we have decided there is no point trying to force the changes through even though both Mike and I believe it would be best for the future of the NHSL.

So the current situation is that things will stay exactly as they are now as far as the team format goes, ie. a minimum of 6 players is needed every week to play in the NHSL.

As far as "The Club" goes, if you want to play in the NHSL next season you need to try and get a pool of 8 to 10 players together.  If you can do this we would welcome you into division 1 no problem.

[Alan Cunningham]

As there are no radical changes being made for next season is it necessary to have an E.G.M.
Surely the minor issues, ie substitutes - if being used and playing for a lower side then they could concede their handicap ? AND needing to stress the importance of no postponements. These could be adjusted by the Committee and confirmed at the A.G.M.

[Lee Crombie]

That's what i thought was happening but the sooner things get sorted the better but i think EVERYBODY from every club who wishes to play in the nhsl league need to be at the next meeting (easy said then done) lol but lets see what happens only time will tell.     lee 

[Steve Howard]

Yeh agree with Lee,re-all players who wish 2 play in next seasons nhsl shud turn up and voice their opinions.Though doubt you'd have much breathing space if everyone did turn up at Lenton Liberal Club . . .
Packed like 'sardines' springs 2 mind,lol! . . .

Of course it's never gonna' happen in reality,everyone wont turn up.I hear so many players saying this wants changing,that wants changing,but only amongst themselves and their fellow team mates.If you feel SO strongly on an issue then turn up at the meetings,2 voice & air your own specific grievances . . .
Or how else r u gonna get heard . . . ?
If u don't want it 2 fall on 'deaf ears' turn up and speak ur mind . . .

At the very least 1 player  representing each team should turn up,much more 'do-able',i would turn up if only 2 listen in 2 what's on peoples' minds . . .

[gary spencer]

firstly on the substitutes situation mike, we as arnold A cancelled matches when we had more than 2 people missing from our team and we did use sean kelly as substitute when we were 1 player down, our B team were constantly taking our players to help them out as a result of there lack of players, so with this it would not have been fesable to take players from the B team when they were CONSTANTLY struggling for players themselves , anyway its not an issue now for me as i am no longer playing for arnold A as of  the end of this season. i hope this clarifies why ARNOLD A cancelled games.

[Alan Cunningham]

As per YOUR imput 0958/25.03.10 - YOU wont be at the meeting ??. Do we need to continue with the E.G.M. considering that there are to be NO drastic changes for next season ( perhaps next ! ! ! ).
'Spider' is most concerned because he hasnt been advised.

[Steve Butler]

Alan,

Everything that is said on this "discussion forum" is just that - discussion.  I know that not everybody who attends the league meetings reads this forum, eg. Jack Packer, Spider, Jim Wright.

It's what is said and agreed at the league meetings that matters.

At the February meeting it was agreed that the April meeting would be an EGM.  I do not have the authority to change that decision.

I won't be at the April meeting because I can't get the time off work.  Those people that turn up at the meeting on 8th April can therefore discuss the important issues and reach an agreement on what happens next, particularly regarding rule changes.  If no rules get changed then so be it.

I have asked Mike Langdon to take the minutes for me.

I hope this clarifies the position.